Another one in Studio One, which drive me nuts are folder clips...
It drives me absolutely crazy, that it turns to a blank color, if the folder track height isn´t set big enough to show all the content with their quite weird type of scaling...
I would like it better to have 1. a better type of visualization (not that much vertical space in between the content) and 2. a restriction to show not all content but content if the height isn´t big enough...
But blending out all content and only show color breaks the general overview for me completely...
Studio One 4 v Reaper Comparison
-
- KVRian
- 650 posts since 2 Nov, 2014
You are right. I usually just use the chopped sounds and not the groove but it is def a big oversight not to create a midi file of it.Trancit wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:19 amInteresting as for me, this is the part, where they stopped thinking at the most important part...:
Every other DAW offering this feature does the whole thing: slicing the audio, putting the slices into a sampler AND CREATING THE MIDI FOR THEM... not so Studio One... the only way to let it do this, is to use rex files from the browser... or the wonky workaround using groove quantization...
So especially for slicing S1 falls way back for me against their competition... this is a huge oversight...
-
- KVRAF
- 6155 posts since 4 Dec, 2004
Let me inject some factual information into this comparison for audio. I'm primarily a Studio One user but I also don't ever unfairly morph or obscure factual matters based on my preferences.
Overall, technically speaking, Reaper is a bit better due to more flexible routing, auto x-fades, customized tagging of exports, various clip envelopes that go far beyond most daws simple clip gain, and some other things. Whether a particular person prefers it's workflow is a more subjective question but the strength of some of those things for audio is undeniable to all but blind fanboys of other daws. Studio One's routing has gotten much better but Reaper's routing flexibility is a rather high bar.
Studio One does have some advantages in that comparison for audio such as drag and drop to render anything, which is truly exceptional and as far as I can tell, doesn't exist anywhere else, non-contiguous range selection, AAF import / export, Cubase xml import and some other things like editable combo clips for audio and midi. The audioloop format is also handy as is it's audio parts which can flex to do some handy things like playing overlaps while the track doesn't. I also find Studio One's track layers (playlists) an advantage over Reaper in general other than just for comping.
They both exceed most other daws by being able to play stacks of audio clips at the same time on the same track, overlapping events. Reaper has the clear advantage there because it's stacked clips can be expanded into lanes, making it pretty easy to have a multitrack mix on a single track with per item FX, which both products have.
Both Reaper and Studio One are **technically flawed** when it comes to how their mixers use mute to emulate solo, don't have monitor busses or solo busses, AFL/PFL, pre-fader metering, and some other things that most "electronic music / beta making" products overlook from the professional audio arena, things that beat producers don't need and don't even really understand. Curiously enough, Bitwig was one of the few who got one part of that right out of the gate with it's cue bus. Reaper has far, far better track grouping while Studio One has much more flexible plugin staging, for example, replacing plugins directly or rearranging plugin positions across multiple tracks at the same time and some other things not in Reaper out of the box.
Reaper's mix snapshots may be unmatched in their scope. Of the 4-5 Reaper features that I wish was in Studio One, that one is easily at the top of my personal list. On the other hand, Studio One's fundamental automation system is better than Reaper's to me, workflow wise and otherwise.
I use both but far prefer Studio One in use which is just personal preference. Give me 70 audio stems to mix and I wouldn't use anything but Studio One or Reaper. To me, editing and mixing in Studio One is a really great balance between features and workflow in the real world where you can't ever have everything.
Two really great products imo.
Overall, technically speaking, Reaper is a bit better due to more flexible routing, auto x-fades, customized tagging of exports, various clip envelopes that go far beyond most daws simple clip gain, and some other things. Whether a particular person prefers it's workflow is a more subjective question but the strength of some of those things for audio is undeniable to all but blind fanboys of other daws. Studio One's routing has gotten much better but Reaper's routing flexibility is a rather high bar.
Studio One does have some advantages in that comparison for audio such as drag and drop to render anything, which is truly exceptional and as far as I can tell, doesn't exist anywhere else, non-contiguous range selection, AAF import / export, Cubase xml import and some other things like editable combo clips for audio and midi. The audioloop format is also handy as is it's audio parts which can flex to do some handy things like playing overlaps while the track doesn't. I also find Studio One's track layers (playlists) an advantage over Reaper in general other than just for comping.
They both exceed most other daws by being able to play stacks of audio clips at the same time on the same track, overlapping events. Reaper has the clear advantage there because it's stacked clips can be expanded into lanes, making it pretty easy to have a multitrack mix on a single track with per item FX, which both products have.
Both Reaper and Studio One are **technically flawed** when it comes to how their mixers use mute to emulate solo, don't have monitor busses or solo busses, AFL/PFL, pre-fader metering, and some other things that most "electronic music / beta making" products overlook from the professional audio arena, things that beat producers don't need and don't even really understand. Curiously enough, Bitwig was one of the few who got one part of that right out of the gate with it's cue bus. Reaper has far, far better track grouping while Studio One has much more flexible plugin staging, for example, replacing plugins directly or rearranging plugin positions across multiple tracks at the same time and some other things not in Reaper out of the box.
Reaper's mix snapshots may be unmatched in their scope. Of the 4-5 Reaper features that I wish was in Studio One, that one is easily at the top of my personal list. On the other hand, Studio One's fundamental automation system is better than Reaper's to me, workflow wise and otherwise.
I use both but far prefer Studio One in use which is just personal preference. Give me 70 audio stems to mix and I wouldn't use anything but Studio One or Reaper. To me, editing and mixing in Studio One is a really great balance between features and workflow in the real world where you can't ever have everything.
Two really great products imo.
-
- KVRAF
- 4459 posts since 27 Jul, 2004
Ok, I belong to this group (not beat maker but EDM), who does not really need this stuff and even doesn´t really understand what this shall do...LawrenceF wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:28 pm ... The audioloop format is also handy as is it's audio parts which can flex to do some handy things like playing overlaps while the track doesn't. ...
...Both Reaper and Studio One are **technically flawed** when it comes to how their mixers use mute to emulate solo, don't have monitor busses or solo busses, AFL/PFL, pre-fader metering, and some other things that most "electronic music / beta making" products overlook from the professional audio arena, things that beat producers don't need and don't even really understand. ...
Nevertheless as you mentioned this, I found it quite disapointing, that the audioloop format doesn´t save any fx for the audio clip, while the musicloop format does but cannot be used for audio clips...
Do you think I am overlooking something or that there is a special reason for that???
-
- KVRAF
- 6155 posts since 4 Dec, 2004
Yeah, it's apparently just not part of the *.audioloop spec. Audioloops are more like their version of rex, does slices and all that similarly to rex, but the spec doesn't capture plugins like with *.musicloops.
No idea why, sounds like a good FR though. Is there a format similar to that somewhere that does? No clue.
No idea why, sounds like a good FR though. Is there a format similar to that somewhere that does? No clue.
-
- KVRAF
- 4459 posts since 27 Jul, 2004
How about the inventor of this:
Ableton and their .alc (ableton live container) format...
This can use either instruments with their corresponding Midi (similar to the musicloops format) or audio with capturing all fx on that corresponding track...
Bitwig got the same and set one level on top with group clips, which includes audio or midi + instruments, all fx, send fx (which can same as in S1 put into the same group too) and saves everything in a single clip...
Tracktion copied the same for Waveform with the Trackloops format, which adds the functionality to choose 1. freely, which tracks shall be included (don´t need to be in a group like with Bitwig) and 2. when reimporting if a pure audio file as bounce of the complete data shall be imported or the individual tracks...
These are the other ones I am aware of...
Ableton and their .alc (ableton live container) format...
This can use either instruments with their corresponding Midi (similar to the musicloops format) or audio with capturing all fx on that corresponding track...
Bitwig got the same and set one level on top with group clips, which includes audio or midi + instruments, all fx, send fx (which can same as in S1 put into the same group too) and saves everything in a single clip...
Tracktion copied the same for Waveform with the Trackloops format, which adds the functionality to choose 1. freely, which tracks shall be included (don´t need to be in a group like with Bitwig) and 2. when reimporting if a pure audio file as bounce of the complete data shall be imported or the individual tracks...
These are the other ones I am aware of...
-
- KVRAF
- 6155 posts since 4 Dec, 2004
Sounds good to me. If you want that in S1 or Reaper make an FR I suppose.
We as end users obviously can't explain why developers make certain choices or not for certain things.
We as end users obviously can't explain why developers make certain choices or not for certain things.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3250 posts since 30 Dec, 2014
Explore and learn to use Studio One 2's Audioloop and Musicloop formats.
Also worth highlighting... and what ATB was refering to in his interview / article, in how to make your own musicloops which contain the instrument and patch settings / midi notes / mixer settings you can recall and use at any time..simply and easily by drag and drop....Picture 1: Dropping a Musicloop file from the Browser into a Song. Most of the time, a Musicloop will be dragged in to create an Instrument track playing the instrument and performance data in the Musicloop file. Dropping it on an existing audio track, as shown here, results in the audio file contained in the Musicloop file being used instead of the performance data.
One of the tools in Studio One's kit is the Audioloop file format, and its variant, the Musicloop format. PreSonus introduced the Audioloop format with the release of Studio One 2, raising the question of whether the world really needed more loop file formats. Well, it's not quite drowning in them: REX2, Apple Loops, WAV and Acidised WAV are really the only formats in wide use. So it would seem there is room, if there was something worthwhile a new format could offer.
So What's New?
The Audioloop and Musicloop formats offer several intriguing features. Like REX files, Audioloop files contain tempo-tagged, sliced audio, but Audioloop audio does not have to be sliced, so the loop can follow tempo changes with or without time-stretching. Interestingly, the Audioloop and Musicloop formats are built on parts of the ZIP file specification, so Audioloops and Musicloops are valid ZIP files.
The Musicloop file format is an Audioloop file with a few extras added. Musicloop files also store performance (MIDI) data, the virtual instrument preset used, and any effects presets used on the instrument channels. All this is in addition to an audio file.
If we take a closer look, some of the interesting possibilities become clearer. For a start, the audio is in an uncompressed format (WAV or FLAC). It is clear enough what is in this file with an Audioloop, but what kind of audio is stored with a Musicloop? It's a bounce of the instrument track to an audio file through any and all effects on the instrument channels. Dragging a Musicloop out of the Browser creates an instrument track (unless you drag it to an existing track), puts the MIDI/performance data on it, instantiates the instrument, loads the preset, instantiates the instrument channel's effects, and loads their presets, all from a single drag-and-drop.
In picture 1, a Musicloop file is being dropped onto an existing audio track, instead of an instrument track. In this case, the audio file contained in the Musicloop file is used on the track, but it could be transformed into an instrument part because the Musicloop contains both instrument and performance data.
The performance data is stored as a Standard MIDI File (SMF), and also as a '.music' file, which is a PreSonus proprietary performance data format with much higher resolution than MIDI. The instrument and effects presets are stored in their native formats, and this is where things start getting interesting.
You can read the full article in it's entirety here with example screenshots, which are in this case related to Studio One 2. Strange to look back at those easy on the eye grey gradients of the tracks back then...Musicloop files are created in Studio One from instrument parts. Here's how:
If your loop encompasses multiple parts on a track, select them all and press the G key to merge them into a single part.
Make sure the settings for the instrument sound and any effects you have on the channel in the mixer are all saved as presets, so they can be stored in the Musicloop file. This is an important step. Once the loop is in a single part and presets have been saved, simply drag the part to the Sounds or Files tabs of the Browser.
That's it! You'll see your shiny new Musicloop file wherever you dropped it, and you can look inside it to see its components. The intermediate step to a Musicloop is an instrument part, and the intermediate step to an Audioloop is an audio part.
If your loop encompasses multiple audio events on a track, you'll need to select them all and choose the Audio/Merge to Audio Part command to merge them into an audio part. What used to be individual Events are now slices in the audio part. Audioloops do not store presets, but, hey, it's always a good idea to store presets anyway, so you might as well.
Drag the audio part to the Sounds or Files tab of the Browser and — voila! — you have a new Audioloop file. (Drag that audio part to the Mac Finder or Windows Explorer instead and you get a REX2 file.)
https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques ... musicloops
KVR S1-Thread | The Intrancersonic-Design Source > Program Resource | Studio One Resource | Music Gallery | 2D / 3D Sci-fi Art | GUI Projects | Animations | Photography | Film Docs | 80's Cartoons | Games | Music Hardware |
-
- KVRAF
- 4459 posts since 27 Jul, 2004
And what shall us tell this??
How music and audioloops are working I knew already...
This doesn´t solve the problem, that you cannot save audio files with FX, which are present on the audio track like you can with musicloops...
How music and audioloops are working I knew already...
This doesn´t solve the problem, that you cannot save audio files with FX, which are present on the audio track like you can with musicloops...
-
- KVRAF
- 5802 posts since 27 Jul, 2001 from Tarpon Springs, Florida, USA
When Reaper is compared to S1 or even another DAW are the free and paid addons or extras included in the discussion?
What new features or capabilities are added? Are they significant?
Some:
SWS / S&M extension (free) http://www.sws-extension.org/
ReaPack (free) http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=177978
Playtime for looping like LIVE http://www.helgoboss.org/projects/playtime/
Have I missed anything? Is there a list?
Is there something similar for Studio One?
What new features or capabilities are added? Are they significant?
Some:
SWS / S&M extension (free) http://www.sws-extension.org/
ReaPack (free) http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=177978
Playtime for looping like LIVE http://www.helgoboss.org/projects/playtime/
Have I missed anything? Is there a list?
Is there something similar for Studio One?
My Studio: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7760&p=7777146#p7777146
-
- KVRAF
- 4459 posts since 27 Jul, 2004
Reaper wouldn´t be Reaper without all these custom scripts... I am not aware of any paid ones though...
Afaik S1 is scriptable too but I dunno how deep this goes and I have rarely seen any scripts for it...
Afaik S1 is scriptable too but I dunno how deep this goes and I have rarely seen any scripts for it...
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3250 posts since 30 Dec, 2014
Studio One has access to an online library called the Exchange which is accessible vie the builtin browser, of which there is a variety of different types of free assets you can download and install without leaving the application. The database of content you can download isn't huge, but there is a fair amount of stuff. It does add some diversity to what the application brings, with lots of macros, different arp scales, editing macros and sample based content.Kalamata Kid wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:44 pm When Reaper is compared to S1 or even another DAW are the free and paid addons or extras included in the discussion?
What new features or capabilities are added? Are they significant?
Some:
SWS / S&M extension (free) http://www.sws-extension.org/
ReaPack (free) http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=177978
Playtime for looping like LIVE http://www.helgoboss.org/projects/playtime/
Have I missed anything? Is there a list?
Is there something similar for Studio One?
There has been some interesting scripts over the years, but generally other than what's on the Exchange, there isn't a lot outside that. I think really because, when people look to be Studio One, they look to be making music with it because it's something that is designed really well out of the box in a way that you don't need to fight with from the outset.
Clip Launching as it is with other DAWS, has been a feature request for some years now, but they have improved the experimentation side of things to be more fun and enable you to produce music differently than before. The drum and pattern programming aspect is as close as clip launching things are currently within the core eco system for that kinda mindset.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njNGxp6UXB4&t=71s
KVR S1-Thread | The Intrancersonic-Design Source > Program Resource | Studio One Resource | Music Gallery | 2D / 3D Sci-fi Art | GUI Projects | Animations | Photography | Film Docs | 80's Cartoons | Games | Music Hardware |
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 3250 posts since 30 Dec, 2014
Only the heads at Presonus know if they are or not, they do have NDA's on such things...and thus don't speak about future unreleased developments they may be currently working on that have not been made public.
KVR S1-Thread | The Intrancersonic-Design Source > Program Resource | Studio One Resource | Music Gallery | 2D / 3D Sci-fi Art | GUI Projects | Animations | Photography | Film Docs | 80's Cartoons | Games | Music Hardware |
-
- KVRAF
- 4501 posts since 25 Mar, 2016 from Seattle
It's a weird decision they've made. I've had to stop using it since I got my S88 Mk2. I miss Studio OneTHE INTRANCER wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 4:15 amOnly the heads at Presonus know if they are or not, they do have NDA's on such things...and thus don't speak about future unreleased developments they may be currently working on that have not been made public.
